Email

The Trump administration's diplomatic strategy toward South Asia, as enumerated in its December 2017 National Security Strategy, places a high priority in seeking “a Pakistan that is not engaged in destabilising behaviour and a stable and self-reliant Afghanistan”. In addition, the administration’s strategy is to “deepen our strategic partnership with India and support its leadership role in Indian Ocean security and throughout the broader region”. Key objectives that deserve to be, but aren't prioritised are seeking improved ties between India and Pakistan and reducing nuclear dangers in the region. Leaving these regrettable omissions aside, how is the administration doing by its own yardsticks?

Not too well, but there are extenuating circumstances. Important diplomatic gears are stuck on the Subcontinent. The governments of India and Pakistan aren’t moving to improve relations, at least not any time soon. Newly installed Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, with seeming support from his army chief, has notably said that he is willing to take two steps forward to Narendra Modi’s one, but this choreography isn’t about to start. At this juncture, they are more likely to take two steps backwards than forwards. It's hard to improve prospects for a settlement in Afghanistan when Pakistan and India remain at loggerheads.

Nor are the Trump administration's national security objectives likely to be advanced when Modi and Imran find it difficult to make headway with Washington. Donald Trump is palpably uncomfortable with being hugged by Modi, and he appears disinterested in Imran’s desire to turn the page. Besides, the price of improved ties with Washington appears high to decision makers in both countries, while calculations of presumed benefits seem modest. Washington’s influence is on the wane, here as elsewhere, and Capitol Hill’s fondness for sanctions certainly hasn’t helped.

It doesn’t take much to derail attempts to improve ties between India and Pakistan. Any such effort can embarrass leaders making the effort when spoilers derail progress, as they are inclined to do. Little did prime minister A B Vajpayee know when he embarked on his symbolism-freighted visit to Lahore in 1999 that secret implementation of the Kargil operation had already begun. Likewise, the 2008 Mumbai carnage directed at luxury hotels, the central train station and other targets put an end to backchannel efforts to revive public diplomacy.

Narendra Modi and Donald Trump were all praises for each other during a meeting in Washington DC in June, 2018 | Reuters

Ever since, cross-border attacks have not been savage enough to prompt a major crisis, but have been sufficient to embarrass prime ministers making overtures to improve relations. The worst casualty count since the 2008 Mumbai attacks occurred in September 2016 at an Indian military camp in Uri, ruining an upcoming regional summit meeting. After the Uri attack, Modi authorised and publicised “surgical strikes” across the Kashmir divide, upping the ante and deflecting domestic outrage. It’s not unusual for Indian and Pakistani commandos to overrun border posts, but it is unusual to see footage of such operations online and on TV.

By comparison, the latest kerfuffle about starting new talks after Imran Khan’s election victory was prompted by a minor attack and the issuance of postage stamps highlighting the Kashmir dispute before Imran assumed office. Usually, a new government prompts a new start, but Indian elections are on the horizon and the Modi government is priming the pump, including celebrating the second anniversary of the surgical strikes. Many good ideas for confidence-building and nuclear risk-reduction measures on the Subcontinent will have to wait.

Traction to improve US ties with Pakistan and India is also hard to come by. The Trump administration's policies toward Pakistan seem to track closely with the recommendations of a Hudson Institute report, A New U.S. Approach to Pakistan: Enforcing Aid Conditions without Cutting Ties, whose principal authors are Husain Haqqani and Lisa Curtis, now on the National Security Council Staff.

They argue that Pakistan’s national security managers “need to take a comprehensive approach to shutting down all Islamist militant groups that operate from Pakistani territory … Accordingly, the objective of the Trump administration’s policy toward Pakistan must be to make it more and more costly for Pakistani leaders to employ a strategy of supporting terrorist proxies to achieve regional strategic goals.”

Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj addresses the United Nations General Assembly in 2017 | AP

This approach has yielded few dividends so far. The Trump administration has “right-sized” US support for Pakistan, reflecting wide divergences on key policy objectives. US military assistance has plummeted, including the unwise step of disinviting Pakistani military officers to attend training institutes. Moreover, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has publicly cast doubt about US support for yet another bailout of Pakistan by the International Monetary Fund. The carrots offered by the Bush and Obama administrations have been replaced by sticks.

The Trump administration’s penalty-oriented, Afghan-centric approach to Pakistan is understandable, but faces long odds. After seventeen years, Washington's patience is wearing thin and its desire for a diplomatic settlement is palpable. But after seventeen years, it is also clear that Pakistan’s national security establishment will do what it takes to assure a friendly, or at least non-hostile, neighbour to its west. Washington’s current talking point about Pakistan “do more” relates to bringing the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating table. But even if this happens, Pakistan’s objectives and plans are likely to remain at variance with those of Washington.

Left unaddressed are two major questions: Is Afghanistan the most important issue between Pakistan and the United States? And is there any realistic way for Washington to expect or influence better Pakistani behaviour on other key issues? If the answer to the first question is “no”, then the Trump administration has the wrong focus. If the answer to the second question is “yes”, then it is up to Islamabad and Rawalpindi to clarify positive movement, and it’s up to Washington to recognise it.

As for US-Indian ties, the bloom seems to be off this rose. High hopes about New Delhi’s help vis-à-vis China in the “Indo-Pacific” region have been grounded by the realities of the Indian strategic culture and domestic politics. New Delhi is more than willing to accept gifts from Washington, but not at the expense of its strategic autonomy. The stubborn reality is that India’s voting record in the UN General Assembly doesn’t vary all that much from China. Moreover, it remains exceedingly hard for any Indian government to reform dysfunctional practices governing national defence or to get more “bang for the Rupee” in defence spending.

Donald Trump at a UN Security Council meeting | Reuters

Donald Trump can add a fillip to US-India ties by accepting New Delhi’s invitation to be its chief guest at the Republic Day parade next January, but Trump’s penchant for tariffs, sanctions and visa constraints seem ingrained. It was telling that the “Two Plus Two” talks between US and Indian cabinet secretaries in September yielded less results than Vladimir Putin’s visit approximately three weeks later. The centerpiece of the Putin visit — the signing of a deal worth five billion dollars for Russia’s S-400 missile system — defies the Trump administration’s threat to impose sanctions.

Washington and New Delhi can still find common areas to improve relations, but advances are likely to be incremental. For the near term, New Delhi (along with other US partners and allies) will have to deal with the Trump administration’s self-wounding actions. This, too, will pass. Until then, the case for heavy lifting on New Delhi’s part for an administration that espouses an “America First” strategy is less than persuasive. The longer term, structural problem of deeply ingrained habits that defy significant change in its national security policies will remain.

A period of diplomatic gridlock seems in the offing for Washington, New Delhi and Islamabad. As long as this is the case, the Trump administration's national security strategy objectives for the region will remain beyond reach. In the near term, the gridlock is more likely to be broken by bad news than by promising developments. Ironically, one good argument for avoiding another crisis until relations can improve is the unpredictability of and lack of confidence in the Trump administration.

Comments (38) Closed

BRROct 16, 2018 02:47am

Rather superficial. The fact the economics rules geopolitics indicates that US and India will continue to trade and do business as usual. The fact that pakistan has little interest in its economy and gambling its future on kashmir shows that nothing really changes in pakistan.

HarenOct 16, 2018 07:41am

Very good analysis of the subcontinent situation.

PulakOct 16, 2018 07:44am

Very good analysis.

RAJA CHILLOct 16, 2018 07:59am

Very balanced article.Appreciated.

FerozOct 16, 2018 08:12am

All three countries are following their own path. USA wanting to cement its Super Power status and dominate, India not wanting to jump into bed with any Bloc and Pakistan whose strategies are always tailored to justifying its existence. India and the US being the World's largest democracies do share some common interests, which really does not mean much. Pakistan of course willing to eat grass but loathe to sacrifice its proxies.

ManzerOct 16, 2018 08:35am

A Pakistani paper publishing this anti-Pakistan essay is an ample proof that Pakistan's press is brave and independent. I wonder if any major American newspaper would publish an anti-American essay of such nature.

DawnOct 16, 2018 08:35am

Trump and Modi - too many angles. Love they will not consider.

Hope.Oct 16, 2018 08:44am

Bad comparison, Trump is making America to fear for, Modi made India a strong nation. IK on other hand is still wondering how to get donations to run the country. Sad isn't it?

Bye_ByeOct 16, 2018 08:45am

Both Modi and Trump knows that Imran is not like Sharif or Gilani and he does not mince words and can talk straight back on their face. He can bowl down both on first ball.

OmarOct 16, 2018 08:50am

Excellent analysis!

LOKESHOct 16, 2018 09:34am

Good Analysis. Both Ind and Pak need to understand the real threat.

BharatOct 16, 2018 09:39am

"The carrots offered by the Bush and Obama administrations have been replaced by sticks." Trump's gift to Pakistan.

AWOct 16, 2018 09:57am

I don’t think Pakistan will have a problem with India taking the lead role in the region as the Strategic partner of the US and with normalizing relationship with India which is in interest of Pakistan provided Pakistan’s security interests are addressed along with resolution of the Kashmir issue. The Trump administration can take the wise step in that direction to promote its its strategic plan

ShahOct 16, 2018 10:13am

Imran Khan whose messege is hope is too good for those two zombies playing on fear.

ashokOct 16, 2018 10:22am

Do not try to elevate Imran to the levels of Modi and Trump. The truth is, outside Pakistan, no one takes Pakistan seriously. The fact that your previous PM was "thoroughly" searched at the airport tells about the weight you have at international stage.

Suryakant AgrawalOct 16, 2018 10:29am

You need two to Tango. Trump and Modi are dancing well.

Ash2000Oct 16, 2018 10:49am

India will balance its relationship with US, Russia and China. India will work for her strategic objective and US objectives but many will be same and same is true with Russia. China, we work together on international forums like Kyoto, etc. where our interests are same and even Pakistan’s interest is also same.

Saif ZulfiqarOct 16, 2018 11:59am

Pakistanis do not want any friendship with US anymore. Trump can keep the hugging MODI .

AkhilOct 16, 2018 12:08pm

Few common things among all three- they cannot keep quiet, they promise more than anyone else and promise before understanding all problems, they always say they are better than everyone else, and they say everything was bad earlier...Hope these commonalities will make them good partners

khanmOct 16, 2018 12:11pm

Torn between two lovers feeling like a fool, loving both of you is breaking all the rules...good luck

UNOct 16, 2018 01:06pm

@Manzer Do always do.

Asif AliOct 16, 2018 01:43pm

Tweet by Imran about Modi, decided the relation between Bharat and pakistan.

BipulOct 16, 2018 03:07pm

There is a missing piece in the triangle. There is dialog between Trump and IK. There is dialog between Trump and Modi. But there is simply nothing between IK and Modi. Once this dialog starts, the triangle and Trump will vanish from the equation completely.

SPRaoOct 16, 2018 03:08pm

@Bye_Bye Sorry to say but this is not cricket dear!!

Shahryar ShiraziOct 16, 2018 03:57pm

@ashok "Do not try to elevate Imran to the levels of Modi and Trump. The truth is, outside Pakistan, no one takes Pakistan seriously. The fact that your previous PM was "thoroughly" searched at the airport tells about the weight you have at international stage "

Do you know that APJ Kalam, while he was the president of India, was strip searched also in USA ? Sometimes these things happen if the dignitary is humble and does not ask for a protocol.

SriOct 16, 2018 04:11pm

@Manzer If Pakistani press is Independent, then it's good for you. Don't bother about Press freedom in other countries. It is for their public to take up that cause.

R K DubeyOct 16, 2018 06:13pm

Interestng article and analysis.

Ali KazmiOct 16, 2018 08:51pm

@BRR;

If economics ruled geopolitics, US ally would have been China not India.

RpOct 16, 2018 09:08pm

A beautiful narrative of realities on the ground!

Bobby PaulOct 16, 2018 09:22pm

@Feroz good analysis. Totally agree with you

Bobby PaulOct 16, 2018 09:25pm

@Hope. Correct

Bobby PaulOct 16, 2018 09:25pm

@Bye_Bye Time will tell

Bobby PaulOct 16, 2018 09:27pm

@AW Good point

R Sultan KhanOct 16, 2018 10:15pm

@Manzer What makes you think and say that the article is anti Pakistani? There is nothing in it to suggest so. It is stating facts as they exist objectively.

NusratOct 17, 2018 06:28am

@Hope. Sadly you are correct.

ShuchitOct 17, 2018 09:13am

@Shahryar Shirazi and USA has to offer public apology for this not in ur case

Brijesh KumarOct 17, 2018 10:31am

@Shahryar Shirazi
Google it again. APJ Kalam was ex president when that happened and US apologized. Did they apologize to Pakistan???